Cambridge's Candidates

As Cambridge residents go to the polls tomorrow to elect their city councillors, they will have the power to shape the future of the council in a positive direction. With Councillors Jim Braude and Kathleen L. Born not seeking re-election, there are two vacant seats on the council. Additionally, because of Cambridge’s city-wide election system, any councillor can be unseated. These conditions have led to a wide field with seven incumbents and 12 challengers appearing on the ballot.

Harvard students rarely involve themselves in Cambridge politics. But as the events of the last year have shown, this apathy comes at a cost. Although the council has no direct control over the Cambridge Licensing Commission, which reviews party hours and sets the closing time of Tommy’s House of Pizza, the city’s decisions can have significant impacts on the student experience. We urge Harvard’s registered voters to select councillors who will work for a productive relationship with the University and who will also serve Cambridge well.

Cambridge Mayor Anthony D. Galluccio deserves unique support for his strong commitment to working with Harvard in a constructive way. His leadership has led to improved town-gown relations. The beginning of the term of President Lawrence H. Summers is a chance for a fresh start for both institutions, and of all the figures in city politics Galluccio has the most promise to ensure that the dialogue is healthy and constructive. The positive gesture he made by holding his State of the City address in the Kennedy School of Government’s ARCO Forum is indicative of the collaborative spirit he engenders, and we strongly endorse his candidacy.

Among the challengers, another candidate with a strong track record of working with the University is John Pitkin. His service as co-chair of Harvard’s Joint Committee on Neighborhood/Harvard Consultation for the past 10 years gives him a solid background in finding common ground on University issues. Pitkin made his name through his opposition to the construction of the Knafel Center, but unlike many Cambridge residents, Pitkin’s position was more of a reasoned stance on a particular project and not an irrational opposition to all Harvard expansion.

With his strong background in community advocacy, Pitkin will by no means be a rubber stamp for University decisions, but rather will work with Harvard to find innovative ways to develop its facilities without damaging the community in which it resides. The “Pitkin Petition,” which served as the blueprint for the city’s first rezoning in 50 years, is a strong illustration of his commitment to a well-considered integration of academic, residential and commercial space.

We further support the candidacy of Ethridge A. King. While a newcomer to Cambridge politics, King is approaching his campaign with a refreshing degree of professionalism. His time as assistant director of development at Boston University gives him an important viewpoint and a keen understanding of the constraints and challenges faced by university administrators. He has advanced concrete and realistic proposals to alleviate the city’s affordable housing crunch, including incentive programs for contractors to build mixed-income developments as well as city-backed low-interest loans to low-income homebuyers. His financial experience in development work and his interest in University matters would serve Cambridge well if he is elected.

E. Denise Simmons is another strong advocate for Cambridge’s low-income communities. She represents the best chance for Cambridge’s Area 4 neighborhood to have an advocate on the council, which it has lacked for many years. Her efforts on the city’s School Committee show a commitment to closing the gap in student achievement across socioeconomic and racial divides. Simmons’ emphasis on setting priorities and following through on them in a concerted and systematic way will be an important asset to a council that often lacks the discipline to stick to a focused agenda. She has also resisted the Harvard-bashing that is the pastime of many of the council’s incumbents.

Finally, voters should recognize that the long tenure of Councillor Kenneth E. Reeves ’72 should end. Reeves has been a prominent voice on the council for years, in addition to serving as mayor. The time has come for new voices to take his place. His recent attempt to condemn Harvard for accepting scholarship funds from the bin Laden family (which years ago disowned Osama bin Laden and condemned his terrorist activities) was manifestly inappropriate and shared in the spirit that forced several local relatives of bin Laden to leave the country because of their surname. Although Reeves is the only Harvard alumnus on the council, he has not used his status to work productively for the city’s benefit, but instead has been uncooperative with the University at every opportunity.

While tomorrow’s decisions are unlikely to change the closing time of Tommy’s, voters’ choices will impact the character of the city and of Harvard Square. It will also shape the future of one of America’s most vibrant academic cities. Cantabrigians and students registered to vote should make thoughtful choices at the ballot box tomorrow, electing councillors who can capitalize on the talent and energy of Cambridge’s residential and academic communities alike.